End of European Civilization

i can see why oliver craner (and nick land) is so drawn to this stuff. it's fun and exciting, sort of like going on a roller-coaster.

any thoughts, i don't have anything intelligent to add needless to say

The president, in other words, understands that for Europe, unlike America, the war on terror is an internal affair, a matter of defusing large unassimilated radicalized Muslim immigrant populations before they provoke the inevitable resurgence of opportunist political movements feeding off old hatreds. Difficult trick to pull off, especially on a continent where the ruling elite feels it's in the people's best interest not to pay any attention to them.

either way the notion that it's a superpower in the making is preposterous. Most administration officials subscribe to one of two views: a) Europe is a smugly irritating but irrelevant backwater; or b) Europe is a smugly irritating but irrelevant backwater where the whole powder keg's about to go up.

For what it's worth, I incline to the latter position. Europe's problems -- its unaffordable social programs, its deathbed demographics, its dependence on immigration numbers that no stable nation (not even America in the Ellis Island era) has ever successfully absorbed -- are all of Europe's making. By some projections, the EU's population will be 40 percent Muslim by 2025. Already, more people each week attend Friday prayers at British mosques than Sunday service at Christian churches -- and in a country where Anglican bishops have permanent seats in the national legislature.

Some of us think an Islamic Europe will be easier for America to deal with than the present Europe of cynical, wily, duplicitous pseudo-allies. But getting there is certain to be messy, and violent.

Until the shape of the new Europe begins to emerge, there's no point picking fights with the terminally ill. The old Europe is dying, and Mr. Bush did the diplomatic equivalent of the Oscar night lifetime-achievement tribute at which the current stars salute a once glamorous old-timer whose fading aura is no threat to them. The 21st century is being built elsewhere.

osama's cold cold grave

oh i should have fuckign guessed it was mark cunting steyn. what will hyperstition link to next? taki? i hate to break it to y'all but if steyn's grasp of demographics approaches his grasp of geopolitics... i don't have to finish that.

You're right Luke, this is hilarious... total nonsense, but fascinating as an insight into the delusional smugness of the dying superpower for whom failure is indeed not an option i.e. for them it is literally unthinkable... which is precisely why they HAVE failed, they just haven't and indeed CANNOT recognize it...

The idea that the insanely in debt America will be calling the shots for much longer is pure fantasy...Within five years, America will be in a Depression that will make the thirties seem like a minor blip...you have to laugh when idiot American capitalist ideologists talk about 'unsustainable' European welfare programs ... when their own short-termist junkulture is the very definition of unsustainability.

All of this reveals that American fantasy is so robust that, not only has 9/11 had no impact upon it, it has actually reinforced it.

Isn't it rather the case that both Europe and U.S. are in decline, if for different reasons?

-- Europe b/c of its demographic crisis & generous social programs, which together necessitate its having to absorb lots of Muslim immigrants, despite (1) no prolonged modern history of absorbing immigrants, i.e., European states are *nation*-states; and further (2) the likely tension b/w Muslim immigrants and the European working & lower middle classes

-- America b/c of its profligacy and lack of prudence: (1) allowing so many dollars to be concentrated in Japanese & Chinese hands, thanks to trade and federal budget deficits (US dreads Sino-Japanese rapprochment/alliance -- hence logic of keeping Korea divided); (2) the Bush tax cuts while fighting costly wars (more fed budget debt); (3) exhausting its military & "soft" power in the Middle East, while China husbands its power; (4) more Bush financial madness concerning Social Security reform

of course it may be the case that U.S. is preparing for conflict w/ China, rather than exhausting itself, by waging war in the Middle East: (1) test and further refine military techniques and lethal technologies; (2) get a stranglehold on oil reserves in face of impending global energy crisis (though there is of course the question of American staying-power in the Middle East, i.e., the plan appears to be to cut and run as soon as possible, rather than exert a stranglehold on oil reserves)

wiser American policy would have been to avoid quagmire in Iraq and simply play regional powers off against each other (which is what U.S. appears to do rather well in East Asia -- but again, the real card here is Japan, which, despite its own demographic crisis, is incredibly wealthy and holds lots of dollars -- will Japan decide for China or the US? -- and there's also the India card, i.e., China/India rivalry which US would do well to exploit)

-----so America suffers from profligacy and foolish policies, which might still be corrected

-----as for Europe, everything depends on its ability to absorb immigrants peacefully, in which case it might do well to try to attract immigrants from other parts of the world than merely the Islamic world (that is, much of America's success w/ immigrants has to do with the great diversity of its immigrant populations, such that it's never a matter of "us" versus "them")

BUT THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT that East Asia is on the rise, followed by India

'Isn't it rather the case that both Europe and U.S. are in decline, if for different reasons?

-- Europe b/c of its demographic crisis & generous social programs, which together necessitate its having to absorb lots of Muslim immigrants, despite (1) no prolonged modern history of absorbing immigrants, i.e., European states are *nation*-states; and further (2) the likely tension b/w Muslim immigrants and the European working & lower middle classes'

when you say muslim immigrants are responsible for the decline of europe, what do you mean exactly?
do you mean 'decline of the european race' or something weird like that?
or are muslims not good at making money or something?

the concepts of 'rising' and 'falling' are very clumsy metaphors here. in what sense is china 'rising'? for the vast majority of its citizens, china is not 'rising'; possibly this was true during the pioneer phase of american industrial capitalism (?1870-1910?), but politically china is more closed than america ever was. i don't think europe is 'falling' in meaningful terms; only if you accept great power logic does it look 'weak'.

when you say muslim immigrants are responsible for the decline of europe, what do you mean exactly?
do you mean 'decline of the european race' or something weird like that?
or are muslims not good at making money or something?

i mean neither [nor do i think the author of the article you cited meant either, despite his american patriot/capitalist ideologue slant]

i simply mean the potential for serious social conflict in europe b/w muslim immigrants and the native working and lower middle classes

that is, i think that muslim immigrants to america are much happier & feel more accepted than their counterparts in europe (despite the extra-legal excesses of the Bush administration in relation to the "terrorism" threat) -- i.e., muslim immigrants do very well in america

whereas i have the impression that in, say, france, in the outer suburbs of paris, that muslims are largely cut off from society and often live in housing projects

and i have the impression that the average Frenchman thinks France is for the French, the average German thinks Germany is for the Germans, etc, whereas in America the average person doesn't think this way because he realizes that US is a nation of immigrants

further, i think that as social services are cut in Europe and as unemployment rises or proves more and more intractable, that its working and lower middle classes will act out of resentment against Muslim immigrants -- and that Muslim immigrants will in turn resent the Europeans

and by all accounts, there will have to be a huge influx of immigrants to Europe to sustain the wealth of Europe

Not spent much time in Europe have you Dominic? Many European countries have absorbed diverse immigrants within the period of modern history and muslims have been arriving for ages.

i was of course making a general comparison b/w europe and the united states

yes, i realize that england has absorbed irish & italian immigrants going back to 19th century

and i realize that western europe has absorbed lots of immigrants from former colonies post-1950

but i don't believe that the immigration rates in europe compare in any way with the us

and i think, moreover, that european countries still conceive of themselves as France for the French, Germany for the Germans, etc -- correct me if i'm wrong here

also, to take the example of Germany, haven't there been generations of Turkish workers in Germany, many of whom are still not German citizens, but treated simply as transient workers, etc

-----really, i don't claim to be that well versed in the facts of europe's social situation -- i'm merely suggesting that there may have been a kernel of truth in the article Luka cited, which is the prospect of serious conflict b/w the european working and lower middle classes and new muslim immigrant populations as (1) the levels of immigration shoot ever upward and (2) social benefits (generous vacation, etc) are cut and (3) unemployment in places like Germany proves persistent ----- that is, presumably immigration will be the antidote to problems (2) and (3), but i see no reason not to believe that the transition won't be rocky